Yvonne wrote:It is about time someone commented on these murals. The one near White Castle on Newark Avenue nearly caused car crashes when it was put up. Drivers were startled by the image of the tiger.

lol what? What kind of moron is started enough by a mural of a tiger that they nearly crash?

I hope the city ignores the crybaby that is whining about this mural. Hopefully they learned their lesson from the Monopoly board debacle that there will always be someone complaining about something. If it isn't a patronizing social justice white person getting offended on the behalf of minorities, it will be a right-wing religious nut with a persecution complex complaining about tigers or God knows what else.

In this very thread we have two great examples. Yvonne represents the latter. And this Sarah Ordway person represents the former. I'm seriously sick of self-righteous white people deciding that they need to get offended on behalf of minorities. It's incredibly patronizing and honestly offensive. Not much different than the thinking of old that white people had to "steward" the "noble savages" and other races that were somehow incapable of looking after themselves.

Best to just ignore everyone and let the artist do what they want, so long as it's not obscene.

This is about the murals in Jersey City and the decry of offensive art. Those who are against art censorship are silent to censorship elsewhere in JC, that is hyprocisy. Besides, the art here is not of the same level as the outdoor in Philadelphia. It shows the history of its people and the town. The art there is beautiful.

Art by committee is worse than no art at all - it becomes boring, sanitized nonsense that forces the artist to water down their original vision. Nothing extraordinary gets created by a committee.

This is such a stupid idea and I have a hard time believing a legitimate artist would ever propose this. This means someone like Yvonne, who is offended by everything, will get veto power over someone else's artistic vision. The only murals she'll allow are ones that glorify either the church or parking lots.

Jersey City Residents Decry Offensive Murals Commissioned by the City

A new petition demands a proper vetting process for murals and claims a number of them have failed to properly engage with the local history and community.

ersey City residents are calling on their mayor to restructure the city’s Mural Arts Program, criticizing the current policies of the nearly four-year-old initiative as inadequate and even harmful for their neighborhoods. An online petition organized by local artist Sarah Ordway demands a proper vetting process for potential murals that includes input from community members, noting that a number of chosen artworks have failed to properly engage with Jersey City’s history and community. As of press time, the petition had garnered more than 100 signatories.

Numerous artworks have frustrated residents since the program’s inception in 2013. Ordway’s petition highlights a mural local artist PAWN completed last Saturday on Sip Avenue, which encapsulates what she sees as the program’s failures. It is, as she writes in the petition, “blatantly insensitive to Native American history and culture,” featuring stereotypical iconography of a wolf howling at the moon and a teepee glowing beneath the torch of the Statue of Liberty.